@article {99,
	title = {A framework for analyzing levels of analysis issues in studies of e-collaboration},
	journal = {Ieee Transactions on Professional Communication},
	volume = {48},
	number = {1},
	year = {2005},
	note = {Times Cited: 3},
	pages = {87-104},
	abstract = {There has been a proliferation of competing explanations regarding the inconsistent results reported by the e-collaboration literature since its inception. This study advances another possible explanation by investigating the range of multilevel issues that can be encountered in research on the use of synchronous or asynchronous group support systems. We introduce concepts of levels of analysis from the management literature and then examine all empirical studies of e-collaboration from seven information systems journals for the period 1999-2003. We identified a total of 54 studies of e-collaboration in these journals, and after excluding 18 nonconforming studies-those that were primarily conceptual, qualitative, or exploratory only-we analyzed the levels of analysis issues in the remaining 36 empirical studies. Based on our analysis and classification of these studies into six different clusters according to their levels of analysis, we found that a majority of these studies contain one or more problems of levels incongruence that cast doubts on the validity of their results. It is indeed possible that these methodological problems are in part responsible for the inconsistent results reported in this literature, especially since researchers frequent decisions to analyze data at the individual level-even when the theory was formulated at the group level and when the research setting featured individuals working in groups-may very well have artificially inflated the authors{\textquoteright} chances of finding statistically significant results. Based on our discussion of levels of analysis concepts, we hope to provide guidance to empirical researchers who study e-collaboration.},
	author = {Gallivan, M. J. and Benbunan-Fich, R.}
}
@article {100,
	title = {Trust, control and the role of interorganizational systems in electronic partnerships},
	journal = {Information Systems Journal},
	volume = {13},
	number = {2},
	year = {2003},
	note = {Times Cited: 12},
	pages = {159-190},
	abstract = {To survive and thrive in today{\textquoteright}s competitive marketplace, organizations are increasingly migrating to new organizational structures in which partnerships and interorganizational systems (IOSs) are becoming more important. The success of these partnerships depends on both trust and control - complex constructs that act on and shape each other over time. Many organizations assume that high levels of trust are necessary for net-enabled electronic partnerships. We examine this assumption from two perspectives: the initial decision to enter into a partnership or alliance, and its ongoing operation. Our findings suggest that researchers have treated trust simplistically, failing to distinguish the need for trust (which is inversely related to the organization{\textquoteright}s ability to control its partners) and the level of trust (which is an actual quantity that may change during the lifetime of the partnership). In many organizations, there is a gap between these two trust dimensions, which management attempts to close by changing the level of control. In this process, the IOS is key. To understand the relationship of IOS use to trust and control, we applied structured content analysis and analytic induction to 16 published case studies and used the results to create a framework for relating trust and control. At the heart of the framework is the recognition that trust and control are not simple substitutes for each other. Rather, they form a dialectic, where it makes sense to consider each construct only in relationship to the other. Using the framework, we identify areas for follow-up research and suggestions for practitioners.},
	author = {Gallivan, M. J. and Depledge, G.}
}
@article {101,
	title = {The user-developer communication process: a critical case study},
	journal = {Information Systems Journal},
	volume = {13},
	number = {1},
	year = {2003},
	note = {Times Cited: 5},
	pages = {37-68},
	abstract = {Although user participation in systems development is widely believed to have positive impacts on user acceptance, it does not guarantee success and there is still much that we do not know about how and why user participation sometimes delivers positive benefits, but not always. Much of the prior research on user participation assumes that user-developer communication will ensure that the resulting system will be designed to meet users{\textquoteright} needs and will be accepted by them. The nature and quality of the communication between users and developers, however, remains an understudied aspect of user participation. In this paper, we focus on the user-developer communication process. We propose a process model that delineates four stages of communication between users and software developers, and we argue that these stages must occur for user participation to lead to effective outcomes. To illustrate our model, we apply it to analyse a {\textquoteright}critical case study{\textquoteright} of a software project that failed despite high levels of user involvement. We show that when {\textquoteright}communication lapses{\textquoteright} occurred in several of the user-developer communication stages, developers failed to be informed regarding the underlying reasons that users avoided the system. Based on the insights from this case study, we advise researchers and practitioners how to leverage the potential benefits of user participation, rather than take them for granted.},
	author = {Gallivan, M. J. and Keil, M.}
}
@article {98,
	title = {Striking a balance between trust anti control in a virtual organization: a content analysis of open source software case studies},
	journal = {Information Systems Journal},
	volume = {11},
	number = {4},
	year = {2001},
	note = {"I employ secondary analysis of published case studies of OSS projects. I used several search methods to identify such case studies about OSS pro- jects. First, I searched the electronic archives of both ACM and IEEE, using terms such as {\textquoteleft}open source.{\textquoteright} "
"Secondly, I searched on Bell \& Howell/Proquest{\textquoteright}s ABI/Inform, a database of acade- mic and trade publications on business and management (including technology management). Thirdly, I reviewed the {\textquoteleft}position papers{\textquoteright} of the various authors who attended the 1st Work- shop on Open-Source Software Engineering (Feller et al., 2001) for relevant case studies. Fourthly, I searched on Harvard Publishing{\textquoteright}s websites, which contain case studies published"
"Finally, as I located case studies or other publi- cations about OSS projects, I followed references from them to identify other case studies. Although I found literally hundreds of publications about OSS development, there was a much smaller number of case studies"},
	pages = {277-304},
	abstract = {Many organization theorists have predicted the emergence of the networked or virtual firm as a model for the design of future organizations. Researchers have also emphasized the importance of trust as a necessary condition for ensuring the success of virtual organizations. This paper examines the open source software (OSS) {\textquoteright}movement{\textquoteright} as an example of a virtual organization and proposes a model that runs contrary to the belief that trust is critical for virtual organizations. Instead, I argue that various control mechanisms can ensure the effective performance of autonomous agents who participate in virtual organizations. Borrowing from the theory of the {\textquoteright}McDonaldization{\textquoteright} of society, I argue that, given a set of practices to ensure the control, efficiency, predictability and calculability of processes and outcomes in virtual organizations, effective performance may occur in the absence of trust. As support for my argument, I employ content analysis to examine a set of published case studies of OSS projects. My results show that, although that trust is rarely mentioned, ensuring control is an important criterion for effective performance within OSS projects. The case studies feature few references to other dimensions of {\textquoteright}McDonaldization{\textquoteright} (efficiency, predictability and calculability), however, and I conclude that the OSS movement relies on many other forms of social control and self-control, which are often unacknowledged in OSS projects. Through these implicit forms of control, OSS projects are able to secure the cooperation of the autonomous agents that participate in project teams. I conclude by extrapolating from these case studies to other virtual organizations.},
	keywords = {apache, case studies, Control, fetchmail, jun, linux, linux kernel, McDonaldization, mozilla, networked organization, perl, rationalization, trust, virtual organization},
	author = {Gallivan, M. J.}
}
